Legal Opinion

Miller v. Sammarco

District Court, N.D. Ohio

Decided April 28, 1949No. Civil Actions Nos. 25920-25923, 25860PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JONES, Chief Judge.

These actions arise out of a collision of automobiles, one of which was being operated by defendant Sammarco, the other being operated by plaintiff Schrock (No. 25923). The plaintiffs in the other actions were passengers in Schrock’s car at the time of the accident.

Sammarco, defendant in each case, has filed a motion under Rule 42(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., for a joint trial of these cases on the ground that “the questions of law and fact with respect to liability are common to all cases.” Rule 42(a) provides as follows:

“(a) Consolidation. When…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Santucci v. PignatelloCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1951
  2. Capstraw v. New York Cent. R.District Court, N.D. New York · 1954
  3. Dupont v. Southern Pacific Co.District Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1964

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API